There's a classic baseball argument of who is more important, the hitter or the pitcher. I have heard this one debated on sports talk radio over and over, and still no one has made a really convincing argument (where are you Bill James when I need you).

Tonight I am watching ESPN's telecast to the Braves vs. the Tigers, when an interesting conversation ensues between comentators Joe Morgan, Jon Miller, and Braves GM John Schuerholz. In 1993 offseason, the Braves had the option to go after Greg Maddux or Barry Bonds - but did not have the money to go after both. Before I weigh in on who I would have went for, let's provide some background:

The Braves had gotten to and lost 1991 and 1992 World Series, so they were looking for someone to put them over the top. Their strength was their rotation with Smoltz, Glavine, and Avery at that time. Their lineup had Pendelton, Justice, Otis Nixon, and Ron Gant.

Maddux was 27 at the time and had just won his first Cy Young Award with the Cubs.

1988 -- 18-8,  249 innings, 3.18 ERA
1989 -- 19-12, 238.3 innings, 2.95 ERA
1990 -- 15-15, 237 innings, 3.46 ERA
1991 -- 15-11, 263 innings, 3.35 ERA
1992 --  20-11, 268 innings, 2.18 ERA, Cy Young Award

Bonds was 29 at the time and just won his 2nd MVP with the Pirates

1987 -- 551 ABs, 99 Runs, 25 HR, 59 RBI, 32 SB, .261 
1988 -- 538 ABs, 97 Runs, 24 HR, 58 RBI, 17 SB, .283
1989 -- 580 ABs, 96 Runs, 19 HR, 58 RBI, 32 SB, .248
1990 -- 519 ABs,104 Runs, 33 HR, 114 RBI, 52 SB, .301, MVP
1991 -- 510 ABs, 95 Runs, 25 HR,  116 RBI, 43 SB,.292, MVP Runner Up
1992 -- 473 ABs, 109 Runs, 34 HR, 103 RBI, 39 SB, .311, MVP

So both guys were entering their prime years (as Maddux won the Cy Young the next 3 years and Bonds won 5 more MVPs). Miller (one of my favorite announcers) went on to ask Schuerholz his mindset behind the decision to go get Maddux. Schuerholz said he had great respect for both guys, and had almost trade for Bonds in 1992 in a deal centered around Alejandro Pena, that got nixed by Jim Leyland.

Joe Morgan weighed in that he would have went for Bonds, as a hitter can play roughly 5 times as many games as a starter. I would expect Morgan to say this, being a hitter from a great lineup that won 2 rings with solid but not great pitching.

I'd say I would go with the pitcher over the hitter, if he is truly dominant (like Koufax, Randy Johnson, Pedro, Maddux, Clemens in their primes) and the team has a good chance to be in the playoffs. Pitching wins in the playoffs, and the Braves went from 94 in 1992 to 104 wins in 1993, and the won the World Series in 1994. Maddux just kept getting better and his ERA just kept dropping lower as he thrived under Leo Mazzone, and the Braves owned the NL East for another 10 years or so.

Since this is a team game, you have to look at the specific team we are talking about. If your team is a cellar dweller, then I can see going with the hitter. Most poor teams traditionally have weak pitching, and one stud starter probably won't be enough to make up for a deficient staff. Put Johan Santana on the '06 Royals, and they could win an extra 10 games. Put Albert Pujols or David Ortiz on the same team, and you have a chance for more.

So finally to the title of this post... I never saw either player in action, but I have heard people talk about them enough to make my ears bleed. Instead of going by the inidivdual stats, I'm looking at World Series performances as baseball is a team game.

Willie Mays teams in the World Series: (1-2)
1954 Giants - won
1962 Giants - lost
1973 Mets - lost

Sandy Koufax teams in the World Series: (4-1)
1955 Dodgers - won
1959 Dodgers - won
1963 Dodgers - won
1965 Dodgers - won
1966 Dodgers - lost

Koufax was as dominant as anyone during his 7 year run, and the Dodgers won 3 rings in that span on his arm (along with help from Drysdale, Podres, and Osteen). Just the fact that you have a really good feeling every forth game that you'd win, makes him more valuable than even the best hitter in my eyes.

I was lucky enough to feel this way when Pedro and Clemens took the mound for my team during their best seasons, having such a strong feeling they'd win. As good as David Ortiz, Albert Pujols, Bonds, or ARod can be, I never got that same warm and fuzzy feeling as they can be pitched around (although Bonds was pretty amazing in 2001-02). In a short playoff series, recent dominant performances from guys like Schilling and Beckett have been able to compensate when their lineups are overmatched by much better Yankee teams.

Please note that I did not use Babe Ruth as an entry for this conversation, as he was both a pitcher and hitter at a Hall of Fame level and won multiple championships as both. And when the conversation goes toward who is the greatest baseball player ever (which I am sure will be visited in a future blog), he is my vote.

PRINT  |  PERMALINK        

Recent Topics

Month List